Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 10388
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Ramesh Sinha, CJ, Bibhu Datta Guru, J
Khorbahara Dhruw – Appellant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
CRMP No. 2826 of 2025
Important Points
Subject
Criminal Law - Quashing of FIR
Act Referred
Headnote
(B) Quashing of FIR - The power to quash an FIR must be exercised sparingly, and allegations involving public integrity should not be set aside merely based on settlement among parties. The court ruled against quashing the FIR, emphasizing the need to uphold the integrity of judicial proceedings. (Paras 4, 10, 12)
Facts of the case:
The FIR was filed against the petitioner alleging corruption, misrepresentation, and illegal gratification related to pension claims. Respondent No. 2 claimed to have been defrauded, leading to this petition.
Findings of Court:
The court found that merely reaching a settlement does not warrant quashing ongoing investigations into alleged serious crimes.
Issues: The court addressed whether FIRs indicating the commission of cognizable offences can be quashed due to the parties' compromise and the need for thorough investigations.
Ratio Decidendi: The court reiterated that serious allegations of corruption should proceed through legal processes regardless of personal settlements and emphasized the duty to investigate fully in such cases.
Result: The petition was dismissed, and the compromise application was rejected.
For the Petitioner(s): Ms. Renu Kochar on behalf of Mr. Rahil Arun Kochar
For the Respondents: Mr. Shailendra Sharma, Mr. Leekesh Kumar
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. allegations of fraud and corruption related to retirement dues. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 11) |
| 2. court's reluctance to quash firs on grounds of compromise in serious allegations. (Para 9 , 10 , 12) |
Judgment on Board
Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
10.09.2025
1) Heard Ms. Renu Kochar on behalf of Mr. Rahil Arun Kochar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Shailendra Sharma, learned Panel Lawyer for respondent No.1 / State and Mr. Leekesh Kumar, learned counsel for respondent No.2.
2) The present petition has been filed seeking following relief(s):
“It is respectfully prayed that the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the FIR bearing Crime No. 181/2025 dated 20.06.2025 registered at Police Station Fingeshwar District Gariyaband (C.G.) against the present petitioner for offence under Section 3 18 (4), 61(2), 338, 336(3), 340(2) & 3(5) of BNS which is gross abuse of process of law, illegal and against the provision of law and thus liable to quash, in the interest of justice.”
3) Prosecution story in brief is that on 20.06.2025, an FIR was registered against the present petitioner and co-accused under Sections 61 (2), 318(4) read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 , on the basis of a written complaint lodged by respondent No. 2, namely Smt. Bishakha Bai. The complainant has alleged that she is the widow of Late Shri Geshnarayan Kanwar, who was posted as a Teacher in Government Higher Secondary School, Borid, District Gariyaband, and who expired on 08.02.2021. It is further alleged that on 08.01.2024, the complainant met the present petitioner, who informed her that for preparation and clearance of the post-death pension case and for release of gratuity and other retiral dues, a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- was required to be paid. For this purpose, the complainant was compelled to issue a blank cheque. According to the prosecution, it was subsequently discovered by respondent No. 2 that instead of withdrawing Rs.2,00,000/-, an amount of Rs.2,80,000/- had been fraudulently withdrawn from her account, and despite the payment, her post-death pension case and other retiral dues were not cleared. On the basis of the above allegations, FIR bearing Crime No. 181/2025 was lodged at Police Station Fingeshwar, District Gariyaband, under Sections 3 18 (4), 61(2), 3(5) of BNS , and during investigation, Sections 3 38 , 336(3), and 340(2) BNS were subsequently added. Hence this present petition.
4) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that that on 20.06.2025, respondent No. 2 lodged FIR vide Crime No. 181/2025 at Police Station Fingeshwar, District Gariyaband, under Sections 3 18 (4), 61(2), 3(5) of the BNS , and subsequently during investigation, Sections 3 38 , 336(3), and 340(2) of the BNS were also added. The present petitioner had earlier filed an application under Section 482 of the BNS S for grant of anticipatory bail vide MCRCA No. 1103/2025, which was rejected on 28.07.2025. She further submits that since the parties have settled the dispute out of Court, no fruitful purpose would be served by continuing with the proceedings, particularly when respondent No. 2, being the main aggrieved party, has no objection to quashing/compounding of the case. Hence, this petition has been filed.
5) Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the submissions advanced on behalf of the petitioner and contends that once an FIR has been registered, it must be investigated in accordance with law and taken to its logical conclusion. The fact that a compromise has taken place between the parties, cannot by itself be a ground for quashing the FIR, particularly when the allegations also involve offences of forgery which are non- compoundable. It is, therefore, urged that the present petition deserves to be dismissed.
6) Learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 2, however, supports the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner. He further submits that respondent No. 2 has filed I.A. No. 2 of 2025, which is a
